Impact of Cardiac Rehabilitation on the Ability of Elderly Cardiac Patients to Perform Common Household Tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The consequences of coronary artery disease may significantly limit functional independence of elderly patients. While cardiac rehabilitation (CR) exercise programs have been shown to improve health outcomes such as exercise capacity, little is known about the impact such programs have on daily functional abilities. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of CR on ability of elderly patients to perform common household tasks. METHODS: Twenty-two postmyocardial infarction patients (10 women and 12 men; age 75 ± 6.3 years) were studied. Patients were tested pre-CR and post-CR. Physical function (PF) was assessed using the Continuous Scale Physical Function Performance 10 test battery, which includes 10 everyday tasks that progress from easy (personal tasks) to moderate (household tasks) to difficult (mobility tasks). Self-reported PF was measured using the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36-Item questionnaire. RESULTS: Post-CR, the global Continuous Scale Physical Function Performance 10 score increased significantly (57 + 12 vs 50 ± 16; P = .002). Prior to CR, 7 patients scored at or above the threshold for independent living, as defined by a global score of 57 or more units; however, post-CR, 12 patients scored above the threshold. There was no change in self-reported PF, post-CR. CONCLUSIONS: A 20-session exercise-based CR program significantly enhanced elderly patient ability to live independently by improving ability to perform common household tasks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".